IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6241 (3821)

"Bert Wijnen (IETF)" <bertietf@bwijnen.net> Mon, 09 December 2013 20:35 UTC

Return-Path: <bertietf@bwijnen.net>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E71C21AE52D for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 12:35:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DmUibqIDKTYz for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 12:35:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from postgirl.ripe.net (postgirl.ipv6.ripe.net [IPv6:2001:67c:2e8:11::c100:1342]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D4CB1AE2AB for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 12:35:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nene.ripe.net ([193.0.23.10]) by postgirl.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bertietf@bwijnen.net>) id 1Vq7Xe-0001bZ-Ax; Mon, 09 Dec 2013 21:34:59 +0100
Received: from kitten.ripe.net ([193.0.1.240] helo=[IPv6:::1]) by nene.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bertietf@bwijnen.net>) id 1Vq7Xe-00061Q-7X; Mon, 09 Dec 2013 21:34:58 +0100
Message-ID: <52A62972.4010001@bwijnen.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 21:34:58 +0100
From: "Bert Wijnen (IETF)" <bertietf@bwijnen.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rob.enns@gmail.com, mbj@tail-f.com, j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de, andy.bierman@brocade.com
References: <20131206100737.B33EB7FC383@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20131206100737.B33EB7FC383@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-RIPE-Spam-Level: --
X-RIPE-Spam-Report: Spam Total Points: -2.9 points pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------ -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000]
X-RIPE-Signature: 86ab03e524994f79ca2c75a176445dd43f92be232ebeb133f91aaee3c0dfa51b
Cc: joelja@bogus.com, netconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Netconf] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6241 (3821)
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 20:35:11 -0000

We have a set of 3 new errata reported to RFC6241.
See: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6241&rec_status=15&presentation=table

We would like to hear from the authors/editors what their
opinion is on the reported errata.

It is probably best to report your views to the netconf mailing list.
but if you rather disuss it here first, that is OK too. We probably
have to repeat the discussion on the mlist later if we do, so best to
do it on the mailing list. It will hopefully trigger views from others aswell.

Thanks,
Bert and Mehmet

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email